£®£°£¦¡: ¦§±²¡&²¯¯¨£
12
. ¡¤¡°¦¡
ÐÉÑÒ40
ÂÑÅÉ ÒÔÍ ÅÓÉÉËÏÍ ËÁ;ÍÔÍ ÅÐÈÍŽÁÕ Ñ×ÍÓÈËÏÍ Î× ÂнÑËÎÍÒÁÉ ÑÒÁ ÐÓÐÁ
31ËÁÉ 32 ÒÈÕÀÂÁÑÈÕ ÒÈբɻÍÍÈÕÇÉÁ ÒνËÁÉÎ×ÍÓÈËÏÍ.
41
¥ Å;ÒÈÒÁÎ×ÁËÎÌÎ×ÓŽ ÁлÖÅÉ ÉÁ ÅÉÑ˾ÈÑÈ ÒÔÍ×ÎÖÐÅÏÑÅÔÍÑÖÅÒÉËÅ ÒÈÄÉ»-
ÌÅ×ÑÈ×¾ ÒÎÐÓÐÎV ÒÈÕGATT, ÒÎÐÓÐÎ7 ÒÈÕ ECT, ËÁÉ ÎÐÉÑ»ÍÅÕÑׯÔͽÅÕÁÇÔÇÏÍ,
ÔÕÁÐÁÄŽÇÁÒÁ ÒÎ×ÅÐÉÅÖλÍÎ× ÒÔÍ×ÎÖÐÅÏÑÅÔÍÑÒÎÍ ÒλÁ ÒÈÕÄÉ»ÌÅ×ÑÈÕ.
.
£ÉÑ˾ÈÑÈ ÒÔͲÎÖÐÅÏÑÅÔÍÉ»ÌÅ×ÑÈÕ £Í»ÐÇÅÉÁÕ »ÑÔ¡ÇÔÇÏÍ
¥ ËÅÍÒÐÉ˼ ÄÉÁÆÎÐ ÅÒÁÊÀ ÒÎ× ´ÐÓÐÎ× V ÒÈÕ GATT ËÁÉ ÒÎ× ´ÐÓÐÎ× 7 ÒÈÕ ECT ŽÍÁÉ
¾ÒÉ ÒδÐÓÐÎ 7ÅÐÉÌÁÂÍÅÉ ÒÉÕ ×ÎÖÐÅÏÑÅÉÕ ÇÉÁ ÒÈÍ
ËÁÒÁÑËÅ×¼
Í»ÔÍ ÁÇÔÇÏÍ ÄÉ»ÌÅ×-
ÑÈÕ, ÅÍÏ ÒÎ ÐÓÐÎV ÒÈÕ GATT ÄÅÍ ÄÈÉÎ×ÐÇŽ Ò»ÒÎÉÁ ×ÎÖлÔÑÈ.
42
ÉÁ ÁÐÄÅÉÇÁ, Î
§ÁÍÁÄÕÄÅÍÄÉËÁÉÎÀÒÁÉ Á¾ ÒδÐÓÐÎV ÒÈÕGATT ÒÈÍËÁÒÁÑËÅ×¼ ÒÎ×ÁÇÔÇÎÀKeystone
XLÑÒÎ »ÄÁÆÎÕ ÒÔÍ¥¡, ÁоÌÎÎ×ÎÁÇÔÇ¾Õ Ð¾ËÅÉÒÁÉ ÍÁ ÅÊÁÑÆÁ̽ÑÅÉ ¾ÖÉ ¾ÍÎ ÅÊÁ-
ÇÔÇ»Õ ÑÒÈÍ ¥¡, ÁÌÌ ËÁÉ ÒÈ ÄÉ»ÌÅ×ÑÈ ÅÒÐÅÌÁ½Î× »ÑÔ ÒÔÍ ¥¡
43
. ÉÎ Ñ×ÇËÅËÐÉ»-
ÍÁ È ÁÐÇÐÁÆÎÕ 5 ÒÎ×´ÐÓÐÎ× 7 ÒÈÕ ECT ÄÉÁÒ×ÏÍÅÒÁÉ ÁÐÍÈÒÉË: ÒÁ Ñ×ÂÁÌ̾ÅÍÁ
»ÐÈ ÄÅÍ ×ÎÖÐÅÎÀÍÒÁÉ ÍÁ ÅÉÒлÃÎ×Í ÒÈÍ ËÁÒÁÑËÅ×¼ ‘×ÎÄÎÏÍ ÅÒÁÆÎÐÕ ÅÍ»ÐÇÅÉ-
ÁÕ’ (¾ÐÎÕ Î× ÅÐÉÌÁÂÍÅÉ ÁÇÔÇÎÀÕ, ÑÀÆÔÍÁ Å ÒÈ ÄÉÒÁÊÈ 7(10)(b) ÒÈÕ ×ÍÓ¼ËÈÕ)
ÅÆ¾ÑÎÍ ÁÎÄŽÊÎ×Í ÑÒÎ ÌÌÎ ÅÍÄÉÁÆÅоÅÍÎ ×ÂÁÌ̾ÅÍΨ»ÐÎÕ ¾ÒÉ È ËÁÒÁÑËÅ×¼
ÒÎ× ÁÇÔÇÎÀÓÁ »ÓÅÒÅ ÑŠ˽ÍÄ×ÍÎ ÒÈÍ ÁÑÆÌÅÉÁ¼ ÒÈÍ ÁÎÒÅÌÅÑÁÒÉ˾ÒÈÒÁ ÒÔÍ ÅÍÅÐÇÅÉ-
ÁËÏÍ Ñ×ÑÒÈÒÔÍ ÒÎ×, Ñ×ÅÐÉÌÁÂÁÍλÍÈÕ ÒÈÕ ÁÑÆÌÅÉÁÕ ÅÆÎÄÉÁÑÎÀ ÅÍ»ÐÇÅÉÁÕ.
Å ÎÉÎ ÂÁÓ¾ ÓÁ ÎÐÎÀÑÅ ËÎÉÎÕ ÉÑÖ×ÐÉÑ¾Õ ÍÁ ŽÍÁÉ ÅÁÐË¼Õ ÏÑÒÅ ÍÁ ÁÐÍÈÓŽ
»ÍÁ ×ÂÁÌ̾ÅÍΨ»ÐÎÕ ÒÈÍ ËÁÒÁÑËÅ×¼ÁÇÔÇÏÍ ÑÒÈÍ ‘ÅÐÉÎÖ¼’ ÒÎ×ÓÁ ËÐÉÓŽ Á¾ ÒÁ
ÐÁÇÁÒÉËÅÐÉÑÒÁÒÉË, ËÁÉ ÑÅËÓÅÅнÒÔÑÈ, ÈÄÉÒÁÊÈÑ×ÍÅÇÅÒÁÉ ÒÈÍ×ÎÖлÔÑÈ
ÍÁ ÅÉÒлÎ×Í ÒÁ»ÐÈ ÒÈÍËÁÒÁÑËÅ×¼ÁÇÔÇÏÍÄÉ»ÌÅ×ÑÈÕÑÒÎÂÁÓ¾Î× ÒÁÑ×ÇËÅËÐÉ»-
40. ¢Ì. ÇÉÁ ÁÐÄÅÉÇÁ
Dispute Concerning Access to Information under Article 9 of the OSPAR
Convention (Irelandv.UnitedKingdom)
, FinalArbitralAward, 2 July2003, ÁÐÁ. 141-142.
41.
LaGrand (Germany v. United States of America)
, ICJ Reports (2001) 466, ÑÅÌ. 501, ÁÐÁ. 99 (ÑÖÅÒÉË
Å ÒδÐÓÐÎ 31).
Dispute regardingNavigational and Related Rights (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua),
ICJ
Reports (2009) 213, ÑÅÌ. 237, ÁÐÁ. 47 (ÑÖÅÒÉËÅ ÒÁ´ÐÓÐÁ31 ËÁÉ 32).
Applicationof theConvention
on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia andHerzegovina v. Serbia and
Montenegro)
, ICJ Reports (2007) 43, ÑÅÌ. 109-110, ÁÐÁ. 160 (ÑÖÅÒÉËÅ ÒÁ´ÐÓÐÁ 31 ËÁÉ 32). £½ÑÈÕ,
ÂÌ. Draft Conclusion 1, Text of the draft conclusions on subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice in relation to the interpretationof treaties, as provisionally adoptedby theCommission at its
sixty-fifth session, Reportof the International LawCommission, Sixty-fifth session (6May-7 Juneand8
July-9August2013), ÑÅÌ. 11.
42. ±Î´ÐÓÐÎ 2 ÒÎ×§ÁÒÁÑÒÁÒÉËÎÀ ÒÈÕ ¢ÁÐËÅÌÏÍÈÕ, ÒÎ ÎνΠ׼ÐÊÅ ËÁÉ »ÍÁ Á¾ ÒÁ ÂÁÑÉË »ÇÇÐÁÆÁ Î×
ÅÈлÁÑÅ ÒÉÕ ÄÉÁÐÁÇÁÒÅÀÑÅÉÕ ÇÉÁ ÒÈÄÉÁ¾ÐÆÔÑÈ ÒÎ×´ÐÓÐÎV ÒÈÕGATT, ÖÐÈÑÉÎÎÉŽ ÒÈÄÉÁÒÀÔÑÈ
‘ÑÅ ÖмÑÈ’ ÏÑÒÅ ÍÁ ËÁÒÁÄŽÊÅÉ ¾ÒÉ ÎÉ ×ÎÖÐÅÏÑÅÉÕ ×¾ ÒÈÑ×ÍÓ¼ËÈ ÁÆÎÐÎÀÍ ¾ÍÎÄÉÁÄÐÎ»Õ Î×Âн-
ÑËÎÍÒÁÉ ÑÅ ÖмÑÈ, ËÁÉ ¾ÒÉ ÈÑ×ÍÓ¼ËÈÄÅ ÄÈÉÎ×ÐÇŽ ×ÎÖÐÅÏÑÅÉÕ ÇÉÁ ÒÈÍ ËÁÒÁÑËÅ×¼ Í»ÔÍ »ÑÔÍ ÅÒÁ-
ÆÎÐÏÍ ÐÎËÅÉ»ÍÎ× ÍÁ ÖÐÈÑÉÎÎÉÈÓÎÀÍ Á×ÒÅ ÑËξ ÒÈÄÉ»ÌÅ×ÑÈ. ÁÎÐÎÀÑÅ ÍÁ ÉÑÖ×ÐÉÑÓŽ ËÁ-
ÍŽվÒÉ ÈÄÉÁÇÐÁƼÁ×ÒÎÀ ÒÎ×¾ÐÎ×Á¾ ÒδÐÓÐÎV ÒÈÕGATTÑËξ ŽÖÅÍÁÄÈÉÎ×ÐǼÑÅÉ ×ÎÖÐÅÏÑÅÉÕ
ÑÒÁ»ÌÈ ÒÈÕGATTÑÖÅÒÉËÅ ÒÈÍ ËÁÒÁÑËÅ×¼ Í»ÔÍ»ÑÔÍ. ¬ÑÒ¾ÑÎ, ÈÄÉÁÒÀÔÑÈÑÒδÐÓÐÎV ÒÈÕGATT
ÔÕ »ÖÅÉ ÄÅÍ×ÎÄÅÉËÍÀÅÉ ÒÈÍ×ÎÖлÔÑÈ ÍÁËÁÒÁÑËÅ×ÑÅÉ ¼ ÍÁ ÅÉÒлÎ×Í ÒÈÍ ËÁÒÁÑËÅ×¼ Í»ÔÍÄÉÁÄÐÎ-
ÏÍÇÉÁ ÒÎ×ÕÑËÎÎÀÕ ÒÈÕÄÉ»ÌÅ×ÑÈÕ.
43. ÉÁ ÒÈ ÄÉÁÆÎÐ ÅÒÁÊÀ ¥¡ ËÁÉ §ÁÍÁÄ ÑÖÅÒÉË Å ÒÎÍ ÁÇÔǾ, ÂÌ»Å:
.
com/2014/02/01/us/politics/report-may-ease-way-to-approval-of-keystone-pipeline.html